Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 14:34 UTC
General Development

In Visual Studio 2017 15.5 Preview 2 we are introducing support for cross compilation targeting ARM microcontrollers. To enable this in the installation choose the Linux development with C++ workload and select the option for Embedded and IoT Development. This adds the ARM GCC cross compilation tools and Make to your installation.

Our cross compilation support uses our Open Folder capabilities so there is no project system involved. We are using the same JSON configuration files from other Open Folder scenarios and have added additional options to support the toolchains introduced here. We hope that this provides flexibility for many styles of embedded development. The best way to get started with this and understand the capabilities is with a project exported from the ARM mbed online compiler. We'll cover the basics here, to learn more about the online compiler see ARM’s tutorials, and you can sign up for an account here.

Thread beginning with comment 650559
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Curious question
by Brendan on Sat 4th Nov 2017 09:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Curious question"
Brendan
Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

The derison was part of the accuracy of the description. They're forfeiting significant performance and in some cases having to drop architectures entirely all because of some irrational fear of the GPLv3.


You're behind the times. The code generated by CLANG often performs better than the code generated by GCC; and CLANG (with its well designed modern architecture) is improving its optimisations faster than GCC (with it's old rotting code).

The main difference is supported targets (GCC supports more obscure old junk that nobody cares about).

- Brendan

Reply Parent Score: -2

RE[5]: Curious question
by tylerdurden on Sat 4th Nov 2017 17:28 in reply to "RE[4]: Curious question"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

You're also behind the times regarding GCC, they've rewritten and update a lot of the toolchain/backend. LOL

Basically they're both now neck to neck. But at the end of the day, gcc still has a bigger library of optimizations. Whereas LLVM is a cleaner/saner base to target a new compiler/language.


What I think it's remarkable how damn good both opensource projects are. They basically put to shame some expensive commercial offerings.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[6]: Curious question
by Kochise on Sat 4th Nov 2017 22:15 in reply to "RE[5]: Curious question"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Only to consider later that private companies paid their tribute by contributing a large amount of the code base.

Edited 2017-11-04 22:16 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Curious question
by Brendan on Sun 5th Nov 2017 00:48 in reply to "RE[5]: Curious question"
Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

You're also behind the times regarding GCC, they've rewritten and update a lot of the toolchain/backend. LOL

Basically they're both now neck to neck. But at the end of the day, gcc still has a bigger library of optimizations. Whereas LLVM is a cleaner/saner base to target a new compiler/language.


The comment I replied to claimed "forfeiting significant performance".

Unless you think "neck and neck" is the same as "significant performance difference" you are agreeing with me.

- Brendan

Reply Parent Score: 1